Theaetetus:Someothermonkey: Sad to say, the majority of diehard xboners sound exactly the same - 'Since it doesn't effect me personally, no one gets to say anything negative. There's no reason people should feel contrary to what I feel.'

I doubt the always online requirement will ever affect me - or at least, if my network connection is down, I've got bigger problems to deal with. But I certainly understand that it's a horrible imposition for some, including people who travel and bring their system with them, troops deployed overseas who play local multiplayer, etc.

None of the requirements would affect me seriously either. I just don't see why people would be okay with losing a freer marketplace - having more options is never a bad thing.

And the bigger problem with the xbone is not if individual users internet goes down, rather it's if microsofts servers go down. The console will essentially be useless gaming wise then.

NathanAllen:Before we all line up to choke down on Sony, remember that month in 2011 when PSN was down? Both companies have stumbled and unless you're in place to get a day one launch version most of us won't be bothering until the must play games start coming down the pipe. Launch titles tend to be over-hyped or games that were already scheduled to be released.

PS3 owners remember it very well, but they're also quick to remind you of the awesome free copy of Little Big Planet they have sitting on their hard drive which in their mind makes up for it.

It's rather amazing to me how easily Sony's past has been thrown out the window with this. Rootkits, proprietary formats and hardware, PS3 is gonna be backwards compatible with PS2 AND Linux-friendly... for a short while. All I'm saying is let's wait and see after the PS4s and XBox Ones are shipping until we declare winners and losers.

EngineerAU:Hebalo: XBONE is an entertainment center, for people who don't want to put together a media PC.

But will it play MKV files and allow USB sticks to be formatted with something other than FAT (4GB max file size) or HFS (Need a Mac)? These requirements might be a corner case that most won't care about but in general I've found the Xbox to be only so-so at being a media center. If nothing else, Microsoft should be terribly embarrassed by the built in music player. Xbox is good for watching Netflix or Amazon Prime but for playing ripped CDs, podcasts, or video obtained from the net (legit or not), the 360 isn't all that great. Maybe the XB1 will be different but given Microsoft's (and Sony's) tendency to err in favor of media company demands rather than usability, I'm not getting my hopes up.

If I'm looking for all those features though, I don't know if I'm looking at a product from a major manufacturer.

Theaetetus:Someothermonkey: Sad to say, the majority of diehard xboners sound exactly the same - 'Since it doesn't effect me personally, no one gets to say anything negative. There's no reason people should feel contrary to what I feel.'

I doubt the always online requirement will ever affect me - or at least, if my network connection is down, I've got bigger problems to deal with. But I certainly understand that it's a horrible imposition for some, including people who travel and bring their system with them, troops deployed overseas who play local multiplayer, etc.

The 1.5mb/s requirement would be irritating as hell for me as it means I wouldn't be able to game if anyone in the house was watching Netflix or some other bandwidth-intensive internet thingy.

Granted, that'll only apply for Cloud games, but they seemed to be implying before E3 that they'd be using cloud computing to make up for their system being about 50% slower than the PS4.

Le Grand Inquisitor:Doesn't change the fact that I will get the new XBOX. I am an upper middle class individual, with constant internet. It doesn't bother me. Plus, Microsoft's all-in-one connectivity with tv, and media is completely unparalleled. The masses that enjoy their consoles more than just gaming will favor the XBOX. PS4 may be the "better" game system (quotes used because they both pretty much will have the exact same output level in terms of power and graphics), but if you want versatility, the XBOX One is the way to go. E3 was only an echo chamber for Sony fans to keep telling themselves how great they think they are. And the media always loves a good controversy to pick up, in a bout a year, nothing drastic will happen on the console front and this whole outrage will be a thing of the past.

Oh dang, that's either some great trolling or some great shilling.

theurge14:Doogles4221: Am I the only one who realizes what Microsoft is trying to do? The Xbox One is the only console capable of true "next gen" games. By forcing internet access and Kinect, games can be made with a whole new set of rules if companies can learn to take advantage of it. Sony cannot have any games that take advantage of the cloud computing possibilities, and with PS4-eye not being packed in; expect NO games that take use it in a cool way.

This. Nobody is going to make any cool games for a $59 optional device.

Nobody is ever gonna make any cool games for any kind of camera-based input system. They've had years to try and so far there's been zero games for the Kinect or Eye that could be described even as "adequate". There's two main reasons for this: 1) It's really hard to eliminate lag from the proceedings, 2) without some sort of tactile feedback (the resistance of a button or joystick) it just isn't precise enough an input system for anything other than the most casual of games.

Now there's still some ways to integrate it by having it as a secondary system (ie - maybe you normally interact with a controller but you gesture for the camera to make your character cast spells or something), but the idea that it's going to be some sort of huge industry-changing revolution and that the PS4 has misstepped by not forcing it on the consumer is nonsense.

Basically, Microsoft is giving publishers the tools to restrict games in those ways, while Sony is stepping way the f%$# back so any publishers who want to go that route are free to suffer the backlash alone.

No,Both have the tools available, but only 1 may have announced it.MS takes the PR hit and Sony walks away smelling good.

Console resources are too scarce to have anything unnecessary coded in that are not part of the dev tools.

The paranoid part of me wonders how much collusion goes on between the companies.

The ps4's DRM is the exact same as the ps3's, this has been confirmed by sony. Several times. There is a lot of fud from the MS camp to try to make it sound like both sides are doing the same thing, but so far, that's just not true. Sony has no plans to create the massive DRM structure MS is doing for the Xbone.

Both Sony and EA have scrapped online passes for the ps4, and hell, EA scrapped all of them retroactively as well. Turns out, the cost of running such a setup outweighs the profits from it, and the hit to the publishers reputation. I can't imagine how many millions it's going to cost MS to keep and maintain their proposed DRM structure.

MS went with the DRM system because they wanted it, due to the desire to have 100% control over all things xbox, and your living room. Nintendo and Sony are more then happy to stick to the profitable status quo.

Gunther: Doogles4221: Am I the only one who realizes what Microsoft is trying to do? The Xbox One is the only console capable of true "next gen" games. By forcing internet access and Kinect, games can be made with a whole new set of rules if companies can learn to take advantage of it. Sony cannot have any games that take advantage of the cloud computing possibilities, and with PS4-eye not being packed in; expect NO games that take use it in a cool way.

This. Nobody is going to make any cool games for a $59 optional device.

Nobody isevergonna make any cool games for any kind of camera-based input system. They've had years to try and so far there's been zero games for the Kinect or Eye that could be described even as "adequate". There's two main reasons for this: 1) It's really hard to eliminate lag from the proceedings, 2) without some sort of tactile feedback (the resistance of a button or joystick) it just isn't precise enough an input system for anything other than the most casual of games.

Now there's still some ways to integrate it by having it as a secondary system (ie - maybe you normally interact with a controller but you gesture for the camera to make your character cast spells or something), but the idea that it's going to be some sort of huge industry-changing revolution and that the PS4 has misstepped by not forcing it on the consumer is nonsense.

Which is exactly what Xbox can have and Sony cannot. Not a game focusing on it, but games where the secondary system can be used. Simple stuff like opening a map, or assigning commands to a teammember HAVE to be assigned a button on the PS4, where Xbox can use voice.As games get more complex, the fixed amount of buttons on the controller is going to be a real problem (MMOs for example), and Sony has no remedy for it. Xbox games can be made with NO button input for something small and be sure 100% of customers can still use it.

Basically, Microsoft is giving publishers the tools to restrict games in those ways, while Sony is stepping way the f%$# back so any publishers who want to go that route are free to suffer the backlash alone.

No,Both have the tools available, but only 1 may have announced it.MS takes the PR hit and Sony walks away smelling good.

Console resources are too scarce to have anything unnecessary coded in that are not part of the dev tools.

The paranoid part of me wonders how much collusion goes on between the companies.

The ps4's DRM is the exact same as the ps3's, this has been confirmed by sony. Several times. There is a lot of fud from the MS camp to try to make it sound like both sides are doing the same thing, but so far, that's just not true. Sony has no plans to create the massive DRM structure MS is doing for the Xbone.

Both Sony and EA have scrapped online passes for the ps4, and hell, EA scrapped all of them retroactively as well. Turns out, the cost of running such a setup outweighs the profits from it, and the hit to the publishers reputation. I can't imagine how many millions it's going to cost MS to keep and maintain their proposed DRM structure.

MS went with the DRM system because they wanted it, due to the desire to have 100% control over all things xbox, and your living room. Nintendo and Sony are more then happy to stick to the profitable status quo.

Jack Tretton disagrees with you.

Asked further if PlayStation 4 would allow for types of DRM for third-party games, Tretton answered, "The DRM decision is going to have to be in the hands of third-parties. That's not something we're going to dictate, control, mandate or implement."

Doogles4221:Order 1884 by Ready for Dawn(trailer only), was the only NEW PS4 exclusive game

So you're defining both "new" and "exclusive" absurdly narrowly so as few games count as possible (you're ignoring indie games, games announced before E3, untitled games like QD's new IP, games that are also coming out for the PS3, etc).

Fan-goddamn-tastic. I'll move it from the "blatant lie" column to the "bullshiat marketing doublespeak" column then.

Enemabag Jones:Virtual Pariah ,scottydoesntknow: Sony already said all 1st-party titles will be DRM free.Just keep the 1st party part in mind.I don't trust EA or Activision to not take advantage of the DRM options if they need to.

It sucks Sony had to add this feature.

It still is the free market at it's best, and gives the public the dollar vote show how they feel EA and Activision or any other companies should they leverage these features.

/I am sad, but I hope the public is smart enough to reject DRM.//Then again if you are dealing with FIFA2014 or Football2015, is there any sort of used market for these anyway?

Why are you buying a console if your reject DRM?

Consoles are the definition of DRM: Games stop working when companies tell it to (no backwards compatibility), each disc is encrypted and require a license from the mothership (licensing fees for publishers), you can't make backup copies, etc.

Nobody is ever gonna make any cool games for any kind of camera-based input system. They've had years to try and so far there's been zero games for the Kinect or Eye that could be described even as "adequate". There's two main reasons for this: 1) It's really hard to eliminate lag from the proceedings, 2) without some sort of tactile feedback (the resistance of a button or joystick) it just isn't precise enough an input system for anything other than the most casual of games.

I've had plenty of fun with Double Fine's Kinect offerings.While I can't see the Kinect as a tool for games requiring fine tuned motions, the ones that I was able to play with the kids are a lot of fun.

Doogles4221:Gunther: Doogles4221: Am I the only one who realizes what Microsoft is trying to do? The Xbox One is the only console capable of true "next gen" games. By forcing internet access and Kinect, games can be made with a whole new set of rules if companies can learn to take advantage of it. Sony cannot have any games that take advantage of the cloud computing possibilities, and with PS4-eye not being packed in; expect NO games that take use it in a cool way.

This. Nobody is going to make any cool games for a $59 optional device.

Nobody isevergonna make any cool games for any kind of camera-based input system. They've had years to try and so far there's been zero games for the Kinect or Eye that could be described even as "adequate". There's two main reasons for this: 1) It's really hard to eliminate lag from the proceedings, 2) without some sort of tactile feedback (the resistance of a button or joystick) it just isn't precise enough an input system for anything other than the most casual of games.

Now there's still some ways to integrate it by having it as a secondary system (ie - maybe you normally interact with a controller but you gesture for the camera to make your character cast spells or something), but the idea that it's going to be some sort of huge industry-changing revolution and that the PS4 has misstepped by not forcing it on the consumer is nonsense.

Which is exactly what Xbox can have and Sony cannot. Not a game focusing on it, but games where the secondary system can be used. Simple stuff like opening a map, or assigning commands to a teammember HAVE to be assigned a button on the PS4, where Xbox can use voice.As games get more complex, the fixed amount of buttons on the controller is going to be a real problem (MMOs for example), and Sony has no remedy for it. Xbox games can be made with NO button input for something small and be sure 100% of customers can still use it.

You do know every ps4 has a headset, and a touchpad, right? Multitouch gestures alone could add tons of possible inputs. Voice could be easily done as well, seeing as sony had games using voice inputs in the ps2 era. Not to mention native KB+mouse options in games, where supported, since the ps2.

All three consoles bring to the table inputs that the others don't have. Nintendo has a built in second screen, sony's got multitouch, and MS has kinect. Two of them have controller-based motion controls. Two have camera of some sort, and one has one optional.

Someothermonkey:The price won't matter for the average consumer? Seriously?

I don't think you know what the average consumer is exactly.

I don't think you know what the average consumer is exactly.

You know why the used-game bin has a million copies of <insert Sports game> <Insert year, possibly abbreviated with a K>?

Someone bought that for $60-80 and threw it away the year after because they bought the <insert year, possibly abbreviated with a K+1> version the year after. How many of these people have all 8383 COD games now? All 3984 Halo series?

SleepingEye:Enemabag Jones: Virtual Pariah ,scottydoesntknow: Sony already said all 1st-party titles will be DRM free.Just keep the 1st party part in mind.I don't trust EA or Activision to not take advantage of the DRM options if they need to.

It sucks Sony had to add this feature.

It still is the free market at it's best, and gives the public the dollar vote show how they feel EA and Activision or any other companies should they leverage these features.

/I am sad, but I hope the public is smart enough to reject DRM.//Then again if you are dealing with FIFA2014 or Football2015, is there any sort of used market for these anyway?

Why are you buying a console if your reject DRM?

Consoles are the definition of DRM: Games stop working when companies tell it to (no backwards compatibility), each disc is encrypted and require a license from the mothership (licensing fees for publishers), you can't make backup copies, etc.

So when the next gen hits, every disc and console from the previous gen is going spontaneously combust?

Gunther:theurge14: Doogles4221: Am I the only one who realizes what Microsoft is trying to do? The Xbox One is the only console capable of true "next gen" games. By forcing internet access and Kinect, games can be made with a whole new set of rules if companies can learn to take advantage of it. Sony cannot have any games that take advantage of the cloud computing possibilities, and with PS4-eye not being packed in; expect NO games that take use it in a cool way.

This. Nobody is going to make any cool games for a $59 optional device.

Nobody isevergonna make any cool games for any kind of camera-based input system. They've had years to try and so far there's been zero games for the Kinect or Eye that could be described even as "adequate". There's two main reasons for this: 1) It's really hard to eliminate lag from the proceedings, 2) without some sort of tactile feedback (the resistance of a button or joystick) it just isn't precise enough an input system for anything other than the most casual of games.

When people like me can sit around and conjure up many ways the Kinect or the Move&Eye could be used I can guarantee there are bright people at these game studios with even better ideas. Good luck getting those ambitions greenlighted when their bosses point to a spreadsheet that says "this fraction of that platform's owners have this device, so no funding". I don't agree it's been the hardware's fault at all. And the new Kinect and the new Playstation Camera are even better.

Now there's still some ways to integrate it by having it as a secondary system (ie - maybe you normally interact with a controller but you gesture for the camera to make your character cast spells or something), but the idea that it's going to be some sort of huge industry-changing revolution and that the PS4 has misstepped by not forcing it on the consumer is nonsense.

Agree with the first thing, disagree with the second thing because Nintendo already proved that one wrong, and that smugness from Sony caved in when they introduced the Move.

Asked further if PlayStation 4 would allow for types of DRM for third-party games, Tretton answered, "The DRM decision is going to have to be in the hands of third-parties. That's not something we're going to dictate, control, mandate or implement."

That's not FUD, That's from Sony.

Nope, still FUD. Sony clarified he was only talking about the ability to restrict online play with passes. Sony will not allow any scheme that would block used games or resales. they also confirmed their dropping of first party online passes for the ps4. the ps4 works the same as the ps3.

Gunther:Doogles4221: Order 1884 by Ready for Dawn(trailer only), was the only NEW PS4 exclusive game

So you're defining both "new" and "exclusive" absurdly narrowly so as few games count as possible (you're ignoring indie games, games announced before E3, untitled games like QD's new IP, games that are also coming out for the PS3, etc).

Fan-goddamn-tastic. I'll move it from the "blatant lie" column to the "bullshiat marketing doublespeak" column then.

Doogles4221: Sony had the worst e3 conference I have ever seen

How do you expect us to take you seriously when you say shiat like that?

Asked further if PlayStation 4 would allow for types of DRM for third-party games, Tretton answered, "The DRM decision is going to have to be in the hands of third-parties. That's not something we're going to dictate, control, mandate or implement."

That's not FUD, That's from Sony.

Nope, still FUD. Sony clarified he was only talking about the ability to restrict online play with passes. Sony will not allow any scheme that would block used games or resales. they also confirmed their dropping of first party online passes for the ps4. the ps4 works the same as the ps3.

Seriously, 30 seconds on google would have told you all this.

"Sony itself has responded with the following: "Similar to PS3, we will not dictate the online used game strategy (the ability to play used games online) of its publishing partners. As announced last night, PS4 will not have any gating restrictions for used disc-based games. When a gamer buys a PS4 disc they have right to use that copy of the game, so they can trade-in the game at retail, sell it to another person, lend it to a friend, or keep it forever."

Bolded by me.I realize the answers are almost non-answers, but, Sony is stating pretty plainly that they are not going to dictate the used strategy of their publishing partners.

SleepingEyeWhy are you buying a console if your reject DRM?Consoles are the definition of DRM: Games stop working when companies tell it to (no backwards compatibility), each disc is encrypted and require a license from the mothership (licensing fees for publishers), you can't make backup copies, etc.

MS is moving to a steam model where the disk is a token. It may be able to be transferred X times, but MS owns it.

The model Sony talks about is not much different from a CD or a DVD*. Once the physical media breaks it is done, but you can sell, loan or buy that physical media infinity times and it will still work.

This is MS changing the game. And if MS does want to go the steam model, they could, but they seem to want to have it multiple ways. If they wanted to change the system, then change it. Don't make it into some backward ass confusing hybrid system.

*I am aware you can copy CD's and DVD's can be broken, and Disney will replace DVD's. But in principle it is comparable.

kiwimoogle84:Gunther: Doogles4221: Order 1884 by Ready for Dawn(trailer only), was the only NEW PS4 exclusive game

So you're defining both "new" and "exclusive" absurdly narrowly so as few games count as possible (you're ignoring indie games, games announced before E3, untitled games like QD's new IP, games that are also coming out for the PS3, etc).

Fan-goddamn-tastic. I'll move it from the "blatant lie" column to the "bullshiat marketing doublespeak" column then.

Doogles4221: Sony had the worst e3 conference I have ever seen

How do you expect us to take you seriously when you say shiat like that?

Pretty much this. I was drooling over the ps4 game demos.

They had the problem of most of the third party stuff shown wasn't exclusive. their first party games and indies were, at least in part with the indies, but none of the major third party stuff.

Overall, they showed fewer exclusives then MS did. They still have some more conferences between now and release though. I just hope they don't make the same mistake as they did with the vita: too many first party games at launch, then nothing for the next few months. they need to spread the love over the launch period, till the spring and the third parties late comers hit.

MS has a ton more money to moneyhat devs as well, leading to a lot of 'timed' exclusives and outright exclusives.

Virtual Pariah:While I can't see the Kinect as a tool for games requiring fine tuned motions, the ones that I was able to play with the kids are a lot of fun.

Yeah, I should have put some sort of "apart from casual games" disclaimer in that post. My bad.

Doogles4221:Which is exactly what Xbox can have and Sony cannot. Not a game focusing on it, but games where the secondary system can be used.

Antimatter's already posted a good reply to this (noting that the PS4 has a touchpad and headset out of the box), I'll just note that the vast majority of games are NOT exclusives, particularly for this coming generation of hardware where the consoles have similar architecture (far more similar than the 360 and PS3). Ports are gonna be really easy in the future. If a game requires Kinect/Eye features and cannot possibly be played without them, most likely the PS4 version will be for Eye only.

Asked further if PlayStation 4 would allow for types of DRM for third-party games, Tretton answered, "The DRM decision is going to have to be in the hands of third-parties. That's not something we're going to dictate, control, mandate or implement."

That's not FUD, That's from Sony.

Nope, still FUD. Sony clarified he was only talking about the ability to restrict online play with passes. Sony will not allow any scheme that would block used games or resales. they also confirmed their dropping of first party online passes for the ps4. the ps4 works the same as the ps3.

Seriously, 30 seconds on google would have told you all this.

"Sony itself has responded with the following: "Similar to PS3, we will not dictate the online used game strategy (the ability to play used games online) of its publishing partners. As announced last night, PS4 will not have any gating restrictions for used disc-based games. When a gamer buys a PS4 disc they have right to use that copy of the game, so they can trade-in the game at retail, sell it to another person, lend it to a friend, or keep it forever."

Bolded by me.I realize the answers are almost non-answers, but, Sony is stating pretty plainly that they are not going to dictate the used strategy of their publishing partners.

Right, exactly how it works on the ps3, currently. There is no change for the ps4. Publishers can do online passes, but thats basically it, outside of digital download games. Physical games cannot be blocked like they can on the Xbone.

These aren't non answers. They are being very, very clear this time around on what we can expect. Numerous execs have spoken on this over the last few days, and all have said the same thing: things are now, as they have been, nothign new.

Doogles4221:Am I the only one who realizes what Microsoft is trying to do? The Xbox One is the only console capable of true "next gen" games. By forcing internet access and Kinect, games can be made with a whole new set of rules if companies can learn to take advantage of it. Sony cannot have any games that take advantage of the cloud computing possibilities, and with PS4-eye not being packed in; expect NO games that take use it in a cool way.

If I am buying a console to last me 8-10 years, I would rather have the one that has games and the new features. PS4 offers better graphics and larger games, but NOTHING NEW. Just off of the presentation Forza is incapable of being ported to PS4, as is Spark. Meanwhile Sony shows a total of ONE new ps4 exclusive game in 2 hours.I understand that the Xbox One is only useful for a percentage of people at this time, but think about 6 years from now. The PS4 is locked into what it can do, while the Xbox can continue to outsource to the cloud for more power. Plus with Voice commands and Kinect built into every system, we gamers will see lots of interesting ideas that Sony cannot copy.

Xbox is the future for those that can deal with Microsofts BS. PS4 is the current generation warmed over again

/ own PS1, PS2, PS3, Xbox 360, Wii// will but a new system, but not this year./// want a Xbox for Crimson Dragon, and Titan Fall, and FFXV, and KH3

all of the "next gen" features you listed have already been tried and have mostly failed

forcing products on people when they don't want them is what's getting Microsoft in trouble

Gunther:Doogles4221: Order 1884 by Ready for Dawn(trailer only), was the only NEW PS4 exclusive game

So you're defining both "new" and "exclusive" absurdly narrowly so as few games count as possible (you're ignoring indie games

(I mentioned them. Sony did not say if they which are exclusive, but at least one of them are on steam right now), games announced before E3 (are not "new" by definition), untitled games like QD's new IP (are not games at this point, just tech demos/ideas that may never be released), games that are also coming out for the PS3.(not PS4 exclusive)

Doogles4221: Sony had the worst e3 conference I have ever seen

How do you expect us to take you seriously when you say shiat like that?

IMO, Sony had one job, show me games that I want to play on the PS4, and they failed. The press confrence was showing third-party games I can play on another system.Infamous looked like it has promise, but showed little new, just bigger and prettier. Beyond: was first shown as a drama game, and the new footage looked like part of it is just another generic third person shooter.

Someothermonkey:SleepingEye: Enemabag Jones: Virtual Pariah ,scottydoesntknow: Sony already said all 1st-party titles will be DRM free.Just keep the 1st party part in mind.I don't trust EA or Activision to not take advantage of the DRM options if they need to.

It sucks Sony had to add this feature.

It still is the free market at it's best, and gives the public the dollar vote show how they feel EA and Activision or any other companies should they leverage these features.

/I am sad, but I hope the public is smart enough to reject DRM.//Then again if you are dealing with FIFA2014 or Football2015, is there any sort of used market for these anyway?

Why are you buying a console if your reject DRM?

Consoles are the definition of DRM: Games stop working when companies tell it to (no backwards compatibility), each disc is encrypted and require a license from the mothership (licensing fees for publishers), you can't make backup copies, etc.

So when the next gen hits, every disc and console from the previous gen is going spontaneously combust?

Asked further if PlayStation 4 would allow for types of DRM for third-party games, Tretton answered, "The DRM decision is going to have to be in the hands of third-parties. That's not something we're going to dictate, control, mandate or implement."

That's not FUD, That's from Sony.

That's Sony saying "sure, if the publishers want to aim that shotgun at their own feet, we aren't going to stop them."

And why wouldn't they? The publishers seem super eager to be allowed to set up that wood chipper so they can jump into it feet first, to the point where not being able to may be a dealbreaker for a game being made for a specific console. Sony will get their money for the licensing fees but bear none of the responsibility for making such an awful design decision. Hell, it might indirectly boost sales of games made by Sony's own in-house publishing and development studios.

Doogles4221:Gunther: Doogles4221: Order 1884 by Ready for Dawn(trailer only), was the only NEW PS4 exclusive game

So you're defining both "new" and "exclusive" absurdly narrowly so as few games count as possible (you're ignoring indie games (I mentioned them. Sony did not say if they which are exclusive, but at least one of them are on steam right now), games announced before E3 (are not "new" by definition), untitled games like QD's new IP (are not games at this point, just tech demos/ideas that may never be released), games that are also coming out for the PS3.(not PS4 exclusive)

Doogles4221: Sony had the worst e3 conference I have ever seen

How do you expect us to take you seriously when you say shiat like that?

IMO, Sony had one job, show me games that I want to play on the PS4, and they failed. The press confrence was showing third-party games I can play on another system.Infamous looked like it has promise, but showed little new, just bigger and prettier. Beyond: was first shown as a drama game, and the new footage looked like part of it is just another generic third person shooter.

What PS4 game did Sony show that I cannot get elsewhere???

to be honest, neither microsoft nor sony showed games i actually wanted to play (well, maybe infamous)

i'd be shocked if any launch titles for either platform even get in the top 10 this fall against MGS5, GTA5, GT6, a 3d mario, cross-gen games like call of duty & watch dogs, etc.

Enemabag Jones:timujinThe one thing they don't cover, and this is the be-all and end-all of why I'll pick a console, is functionality and (as subsets) online multiplayer and, more difficult to describe, game "feel"... I simply prefer playing games on my Xbox over my PS3. I have no idea yet which of the new consoles I'll like better, but none of the "three fronts" listed above mean much to me.

Can Steve Ballmer come over to your house once in while and verbally abuse you too, as long as the gameplay experience works on the console?

Congrats, that's the stupidest reply to a comment I've received this month. Come up and get your prize, a brand new KHITBASH!

FlashHarry:i've been a loyal xbox owner since the first one back in 2001, but there's NO way i'll get an xbone. when it comes time to get a "next gen" console, it'll be a PS4. microsoft really screwed their customers (and themselves) on this one.

Well the boobies pretty much said everything I was going to come in here and post. I'm going to miss the 360 controller though.

While I have preordered my PS4 and almost have it paid off already. (thanks to $100 trade in credit for 5 games at EB even though I took it up the ass) I'm still very much intrigued by the Xbox One.

After reading that long ass pastebin from a random MS Engineer, it explains things better than any of the big boys at MS have been able to do.

I understand where MS is trying to push things, and I commmend them for it. I just don't think gamers are ready for it.

There's still a little bit of me thinking that maybe the Xbox One is better for the long term of console gaming, and maybe that by the time the next gen after this one rolls around, the Xbox One will be the system that ended up being more successful.

Virtual Pariah:I realize the answers are almost non-answers, but, Sony is stating pretty plainly that they are not going to dictate the used strategy of their publishing partners.

That's an answer. It's not "the used game market won't be killed", it's "if something kills the used game market, it's not going to be anything we did."

While I do wish Sony (and Nintendo) would take more of a stance on this used game thing, I understand that they are somewhat dependent on developers and thus need to not deliberately provoke them. Within that though this is about as succinct a tell-off as they can deliver. It's basically, "you want to start a business war? Fine, do what you want, but we won't be helping you do it."

There's a subtle difference there though: while MS has outright said that XBLA titles will never work on the Xbone, Sony has said that PSN titles won't transfer over at launch time, but that they are looking into alternatives for sometime down the road. Basically, one is "f%$# your games", while the other is "uhm... we'll think about it."

Like I said, subtle difference. It's not much better, but at least the Sony response has some slim chance of leading to something.

And why wouldn't they? The publishers seem super eager to be allowed to set up that wood chipper so they can jump into it feet first, to the point where not being able to may be a dealbreaker for a game being made for a specific console. Sony will get their money for the licensing fees but bear none of the responsibility for making such an awful design decision. Hell, it might indirectly boost sales of games made by Sony's own in-house publishing and development studios.

They shouldn't.

All I've been trying to say is that although MS has been terrible in explaining the DRM situation, It's ultimately going to be up to the publishers to implement the tools.

MS would have been better off showing the new system and stating that it will come with a "free" Kinect while leaving the DRM issues to the publishers pressers.Just because the DRM system is built into the box, if one publisher turns it on, it would have been the fault of the publisher, rather than the fault of the box producer.

IMO Microsoft outsmarted themselves by revealing a "feature" that should have sat in an internal memo to the publishers. If it was never turned on, it would have been irrelevant.

What really gets under my skin are the comments that begin with "Microsoft better have some really awesome games..."

I want to know how X number of "awesome" games will make any amount of shiat acceptable. Shouldn't there be a line you draw? I mean, the XBone has pretty much hit upon all the worst transgressions we could imagine in gaming, which I won't bother to repeat. When do we say, "Keep your games, I don't care how good they are, I'm not going to support your shiatty practices"? How does Microsoft still have a built-in fanbase after what they've pulled? Not to get political, but I keep hearing about the rise of the Libertarian and the wonders of the free market, but it seems like I'm the only person I know trying to make this free market work by not buying things on principle.

I was so looking forward to SimCity. Guess what? I haven't played it. I didn't buy it, I didn't pirate it, I didn't crack it. EA didn't get my money, nor can they blame me for a lost sale. I can only wonder what amazing things could have happened if more people did what I do all the time. I guess we'll never know, because anyone would willingly be farked in every available hole by AIDS-infested gorillas if the pot is sweet enough.

Doogles4221:What PS4 game did Sony show that I cannot get elsewhere???

Again; you're defining both "new" and "exclusive" absurdly narrowly so as few games count as possible, then whining that there's not many new exclusives. You're actually claiming that announced, demoed but unnamed games don't count as exclusives, for god's sake.

Now that said; it's true that the Xbox One has a few more exclusives. There is a lot of PS4 games that seem to be semi-exclusive (they're not coming out on the Xbone, but they are coming out on the PS3, PC and/or the WiiU), though. Personally I never get around to playing 1/10th of all the good-looking games that get released these days (damn you, employment/family/hobbies/life), so exclusives aren't usually a dealmaker for me either way.

And why wouldn't they? The publishers seem super eager to be allowed to set up that wood chipper so they can jump into it feet first, to the point where not being able to may be a dealbreaker for a game being made for a specific console. Sony will get their money for the licensing fees but bear none of the responsibility for making such an awful design decision. Hell, it might indirectly boost sales of games made by Sony's own in-house publishing and development studios.

They shouldn't.

All I've been trying to say is that although MS has been terrible in explaining the DRM situation, It's ultimately going to be up to the publishers to implement the tools.

MS would have been better off showing the new system and stating that it will come with a "free" Kinect while leaving the DRM issues to the publishers pressers.Just because the DRM system is built into the box, if one publisher turns it on, it would have been the fault of the publisher, rather than the fault of the box producer.

IMO Microsoft outsmarted themselves by revealing a "feature" that should have sat in an internal memo to the publishers. If it was never turned on, it would have been irrelevant.

That would matter if the feature was optional on the Xbone at all. With the way their system is, even if the publisher doesn't want that level of DRM they get it anyway. Games MUST be activated online with MS's servers. Games MUST be tied to an account. Games MUST be installed to the hard drive. Trading games can ONLY be done once for a limited time. The console MUST get on the internet at least once every 24 hours for games to continue working. These are things which are REQUIRED of any game on the Xbone, period. In this case, it very much is the fault of the box producer.

Gunther:Doogles4221: What PS4 game did Sony show that I cannot get elsewhere???

Again; you're defining both "new" and "exclusive" absurdly narrowly so as few games count as possible, then whining that there's not many new exclusives. You're actually claiming that announced, demoed but unnamed games don't count as exclusives, for god's sake.

Now that said; it's true that the Xbox One has a few more exclusives. There is a lot of PS4 games that seem to be semi-exclusive (they're not coming out on the Xbone, but they are coming out on the PS3, PC and/or the WiiU), though. Personally I never get around to playing 1/10th of all the good-looking games that get released these days (damn you, employment/family/hobbies/life), so exclusives aren't usually a dealmaker for me either way.

I run a huge used video games store. (Mom and pop not corporate) and I love telling people about the xbone. Obviously, as a retailer in the used game market, I don't like the direction MS is trying to take things, and I was a bit worried before Sony put their cards on the table. Now I'm just elated. All I have to do is tell the truth, and the customer immediately realizes that one of the two companies is trying to screw everyone over. This kind of totalitarian money grubbing bullshiat isn't going to happen for at least another three console generations now that MS is drowning in their own greed. Fan-farking-tastic.

Customer: Hey, are you going to be getting any xbox ones in? Can I pre-order one?

Ego edo infantia cattus:I run a huge used video games store. (Mom and pop not corporate) and I love telling people about the xbone. Obviously, as a retailer in the used game market, I don't like the direction MS is trying to take things, and I was a bit worried before Sony put their cards on the table. Now I'm just elated. All I have to do is tell the truth, and the customer immediately realizes that one of the two companies is trying to screw everyone over. This kind of totalitarian money grubbing bullshiat isn't going to happen for at least another three console generations now that MS is drowning in their own greed. Fan-farking-tastic.

Customer: Hey, are you going to be getting any xbox ones in? Can I pre-order one?

timswar:Seriously people. GIVE SONY TIME. They will do something to piss off gamers across the world.

They haven't disappointed yet.

/For the record, I thoroughly enjoy my PS3. I just recognize that it's always a countdown until the next Sony shiatstorm.

all 3 companies are notorious for eventually having major screwups and/or dropping the ball, there's not a great history in video games of perfection

that said, every dog has its day, and in this case sony's going to reap the rewards while microsoft eats dirt

but hey, 3rd console curse and all that, if nintendo/sega/sony went through it then who cares if microsoft goes through it, if they do a sega and never figure it out, oh well, gaming will go on, and it's not our job as gamers to prop up companies so let them eat dirt

Yeah I'm a long time Xbox fan, but I won't be buying it unless they change their policies. I am online 24/7, I rarely buy used games, and I never share my games... but I care because I think people should be allowed to.

I won't be getting a Wii as I feel like Nintendo has focused their product more towards children's games, and I really couldn't care for anything other than Zelda. All the new technology towards visual stunning video games and Nintendo still makes blobby cartoon characters.

PS4 will be my choice if I get one at all. Will probably wait a year or so to let the price drop first though.

And then they'll go buy it from amazon.com while you complain that internet business is killing mom & pop stores.

Right now XB1 is the top selling item in the video game section of Amazon. PS4 is the second. It'll probably flip flop between the two for the next month and then again when the release date nears. People are going to buy the new consoles whether Farkers approve or not.